Is it weird to like guns?

[petej0]

Because you can't live a life thinking that something can possibly happen all the time or you can but that is a prison, not a life.
A piece of building can fall on my head and I am not planing to go and buy a helmet to wear it every day....

Nobody is saying you have to live your life that way. Some do. Some also take reasonable precautions. There is nothing wrong with learning CPR to save someone, there is nothing wrong with having smoke detectors or fire extinguishers in your home. There is nothing wrong with wearing a seatbelt. There is nothing wrong with putting a fence around your pool to keep young children from falling in. There is nothing wrong with wearing life vest on a boat. There is nothing wrong with learning self defense if you have to defend yourself. People take precautions for events that may happen. In my area recently a real estate agent was murdered in a home they were showing by some random person. Would it be prudent for real estate agents to carry some form of protection? Sure, that doesnt make them paranoid. Everyone heard about the college student murdered while out for a run, does that mean it is unreasonable for young pretty girls to bring some sort of protection?

[ellieg]

People seems to have the bizarre assumption that ''LEFTIES'' are against hunting because they wonder why there is more paperwork required to buy a cellphone than an AK-47. Unless you shoot extremely badly, however (which make me wonders the help the said individual would be in one of those firefights with terrorists at the Wallmart that seems so likely) I still don't understand why you would need 34 different guns to shoot a deer, or why you need an AK-47 or a shotgun to do so.

Yes, I know, because you can. Wearing life preserved is perfectly legal, but wearing one in the middle of Arizona would be still weird.

Same reason people have alts in video games. Variety is the spice of life. Also different guns have slightly different uses which are needed.

[sarahtasher]

As for the protection, again, there are difference between what everyone on Earth would think is rational and what Americans think is normal.

Buying an handgun for protection : bah, whatever rock your boat, but I honestly and sincerely fails to see what kind of scenario would realistically make a gun useful, and I live(d) in a crime-ridden (yes, with minorities) place in Canada. Of course, it's crime-ridden in Canada. If someone mug you (realistic scenario) do you REALLY think it's worth risking YOUR life for a library card and credit card that can be cancelled ?

What the usual suspects brag about, what TV shows about US gun nuts : buying dozens of guns and thousands of round of ammo, hide guns in every room of a dilapidated shack in Alabama to fight off ''intruders'', those drills about ''tactical shooting'' with a shotgun under the bed : unless you are buying Sudafed, looks extremely lunatic. Looks SUPER lunatic if you are someone with the money to buy all those toys that allow you to cosplay a SEAL while looking like a seal (ZING), looks lunatic and sad if you don't have the money and buy guns instead of much more pratical stuff .

(Actually, I watched King of the Hill with such a drill and assumed it was part of a satire-even I did not think Americans could be that….uh….uh….)

[petej0]

People seems to have the bizarre assumption that ''LEFTIES'' are against hunting because they wonder why there is more paperwork required to buy a cellphone than an AK-47. Unless you shoot extremely badly, however (which make me wonders the help the said individual would be in one of those firefights with terrorists at the Wallmart that seems so likely)

If by AK-47 you mean full automatic then you are required to fill a lot more paper work then is required to buy a cell phone.

I still don't understand why you would need 34 different guns to shoot a deer, or why you need an AK-47 or a shotgun to do so.

I dont hunt so I wont be able to explain it to you as good as they could. However hyperbole aside, it offers variety, maybe they like to shoot certain types of game with certain types of weapon. Obviously small game you would choose a shot gun. Larger game would require a rifle. Yet even larger game would require a different type of rifle.

As long as what they are doing is legal it shouldnt matter what they choose to do with their weapons or how many they choose to have. I dont understand why someone would need 30 cars but I dont question their right to own them. I dont understand why someone would need 3 houses but I dont question their right to own them.

[bbr]

Nobody fetishizes them.

You would be surprised.

Guns "are" cool though.
There's nothing like the feeling of power of pushing a button and seeing whatever is at the other end suddenlly having a huge hole in it.
Watermelons, cans, beer bottles,. you name it.
The repeating shotgun is an insane thing as well. If you haven't heard of it before, check youtube.

But, coolness aside, they are expensive and very dangerous and should be treated as such.
Keep away from kids, and keep away from people with mental issues.
And yes, in a way a fetish is a mental thing as well - one of the most common and most accepted mental issues in the world,.
but when it comes to inanimate objects such as guns I'd definitely consider it a weird fetish.

[Bathory]

Na, it's just weird when people start obsessing over them. Like all things.

[Halicia]

Even though I prefer swords & sorcery in videogames, generally, I find guns more appealing in gameplay.

Swordplay is just unwieldy to translate to most controllers. Either you're locked into certain moves/combos, or you have to do sweeps and drags with your controller/mouse. With a gun it's usually point and click.

I rarely even see bows & magic use such an intuitive system, although it seems like they'd be well suited for it.

[Deleted]

People seems to have the bizarre assumption that ''LEFTIES'' are against hunting because they wonder why there is more paperwork required to buy a cellphone than an AK-47. Unless you shoot extremely badly, however (which make me wonders the help the said individual would be in one of those firefights with terrorists at the Wallmart that seems so likely) I still don't understand why you would need 34 different guns to shoot a deer, or why you need an AK-47 or a shotgun to do so.

Yes, I know, because you can. Wearing life preserved is perfectly legal, but wearing one in the middle of Arizona would be still weird.

The "LUFTIES" want to steal peoples voice too. That's why there's cell paperwork.

- - - Updated - - -

Conquered by who?

Your rulers. I would post that trainspotting scene but that 's too simple of an explanation.

[RangerDaz]

I think it is wierd that some countries allow anybody to buy guns in a store without any control or obligatory regular psychiatric evaluations for the users.

[Shadowferal]

I think it is wierd that some countries allow anybody to buy guns in a store without any control or obligatory regular psychiatric evaluations for the users.

I think it's weird that many people seem to imagine that the US is included in "such countries."

[EyelessCrow]

I think it's weird that many people seem to imagine that the US is included in "such countries."

I'm not really commenting on the lack of checks because I am sure they are there, but what I found kinda funny was the last time I bought a handgun, the background check came back clean so fast the guy behind the counter went "I swear that came back clean before I pressed Enter, I think that was the fastest check I have ever ever seen." This was for a Glock 43.

[ellieg]

I'm not really commenting on the lack of checks because I am sure they are there, but what I found kinda funny was the last time I bought a handgun, the background check came back clean so fast the guy behind the counter went "I swear that came back clean before I pressed Enter, I think that was the fastest check I have ever ever seen." This was for a Glock 43.

I'm jealous. I'm in maryland and if I want a handgun I have to sit through classes, take a test, and pay for all of that.

[Shadowferal]

I live in NJ and you need a permit, fingerprinting, et al to be able to legally own a firearm.

[Pterodactylus]

It isnt unreasonable to think you can become a victim of a crime.

You are just as likely to prevent yourself from becoming a victim of a crime by carrying a gun or a dead fish. It's unreasonable to think that having a gun will protect you - it wont. It's fantasy and myth that people believe carrying a gun is some panacea against crime.

The crux of our points of view, at least for me, stems from the claim ammosexuals make that they need a gun to protect themselves. The data says it makes no difference. So folks are carrying a gun, because they are afraid of being a victim, even though having that gun will make no difference in a) chance of becoming a victim and b) outcome of potential crime. So not only do I think these people cowards - they are deluded.

Should we keep going? Will we change each other's opinions? Not likely.

[Shadowferal]

You are just as likely to prevent yourself from becoming a victim of a crime by carrying a gun or a dead fish. It's unreasonable to think that having a gun will protect you - it wont. It's fantasy and myth that people believe carrying a gun is some panacea against crime. The crux of our points of view, at least for me, stems from the claim ammosexuals make that they need a gun to protect themselves. The data says it makes no difference.

"Your" data...
But as you say, your opinion isn't going to change no matter what the truth is...or the facts...or the data.

[Jonnusthegreat]

To you, maybe.

No, to anyone.

[Santti]

No.

The way Americans like guns? In my opinion, yes.

[petej0]

You are just as likely to prevent yourself from becoming a victim of a crime by carrying a gun or a dead fish. It's unreasonable to think that having a gun will protect you - it wont. It's fantasy and myth that people believe carrying a gun is some panacea against crime.

The crux of our points of view, at least for me, stems from the claim ammosexuals make that they need a gun to protect themselves. The data says it makes no difference. So folks are carrying a gun, because they are afraid of being a victim, even though having that gun will make no difference in a) chance of becoming a victim and b) outcome of potential crime. So not only do I think these people cowards - they are deluded.

Should we keep going? Will we change each other's opinions? Not likely.

You keep failing to realize that you are talking about something that was not the original point of the argument. I dont care if being armed will make a difference or not. I dont care if being armed will stop or crime or not. My point is that people do so for a reason. You called them paranoid and cowards but you fail to answer if someone who carries a knife or takes self defense classes should be considered paranoid or coward as well.

Having a fire extinguisher in your home may not make a difference if your house catches on fire, but having it may make the home owner sleep better at night.
Having a firearm on you may not make a difference if you are robbed or assaulted, but having it may make you more comfortable while traveling at night.

You just want to look down on people who carry guns because you think you are some tough person who doesnt need it. Good for you. I dont look down on people because I know what works for you or me wont work for everyone else. I dont see a woman that was a rape survivor who wants to carry mace as a paranoid coward. I also dont see a woman that was a rape survivor who wants to carry a small handgun as a paranoid coward either.

[Pterodactylus]

"Your" data...
But as you say, your opinion isn't going to change no matter what the truth is...or the facts...or the data.

But the data supports my opinion - at least about the effectiveness of guns. Perhaps my word choice of coward is too loaded of a word and folks are triggered.

- - - Updated - - -

Having a fire extinguisher in your home may not make a difference if your house catches on fire

I'll concede paranoid coward is too loaded of a word, but it still boils down to fear at some level for their motivation.

As for the fire extinguisher - the big difference between it and the gun is the fire extinguisher is actually able to perform it's intended action.

[Shadowferal]

But the data supports my opinion - at least about the effectiveness of guns. Perhaps my word choice of coward is too loaded of a word and folks are triggered.

No.
You seem unable to grasp that "your" data doesn't match well with data that congress has had to hear about from both sides. Which even from the more conservative estimations, blow you data clear out of the water.
So really...keep your opinion...and whatever "facts" you have.
I really don't need to hear this argument over and over again and again...